Cover not available
Part of
The Diachrony of Classification Systems
Edited by William B. McGregor and Søren Wichmann
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 342] 2018
► pp. 9–32

The semantic reduction of the noun universe and the diachrony of nominal classification

Classifiers and noun class markers are often semantically general and semantically opaque compared to open-class nouns, and in this sense they constitute a semantic reduction of the noun universe. These two semantic characteristics also play important roles in the diachronic development of nominal classification systems. First, the need for semantically general forms for anaphoric reference may be a possible motivation for developing nominal classification in the first place. Second, opaque classification, which may, for example, emerge through coalescence of classes with homophonous markers, may be replaced by transparent classification because of the incompatibility of opaque classification and certain syntactic constructions, such as contrastive focus. Finally, opaque classification, typical of grammatical gender systems, is less likely to diffuse through language contact than transparent classification, which is typical for other types of systems, including numeral classifier systems.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.A definition of nominal classification
  • 3.The pragmatics of semantic generality
  • 4.Semantic opacity and renewal
    • 4.1Descriptive content of classifiers, semantically transparent and opaque classification
    • 4.2From semantically transparent to opaque assignment
    • 4.3Replacement of opaque classification by transparent classification
  • 5.Differential diffusability of nominal classification
  • 6.Summary and conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 May 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.342.02sei
References (44)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2000. Classifiers: A typology of noun categorization devices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Allan, Keith. 1977. “Classifiers”. Language 53.283–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ariel, Mira. 1988. “Referring and Accessibility”. Journal of Linguistics 24.65–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barlow, Michael. 1992. A Situated Theory of Agreement. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Bokamba, Eyamba G. 1977. “The Impact of Multilingualism on Language Structures: The case of Central Africa”. Anthropological Linguistics 19.181–202.Google Scholar
Bosch, Peter. 1988. “Representing and Accessing Focussed Referents”. Language and Cognitive Processes 3.207–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1994. “Towards a Typology of Reference-Tracking Devices”. Handout for paper presented at the International Symposium on Language Typology, University of Tsukuba, January 1994.
Contini-Morava, Ellen. 1994. Noun Classification in Swahili (= Publications of the Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanities, Research Reports, 2nd Series). Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia. [URL]. (Accessed: 1 March 2014.)Google Scholar
. 1997. “Noun Classification in Swahili: A cognitive-semantic analysis using a computer database”. African Linguistics at the Crossroads. Papers from Kwaluseni, 1st World Congress of African Linguistics, Swaziland, 18–22. VII. 1994 ed. by Robert K. Herbert, 599–628. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe.Google Scholar
Contini-Morava, Ellen & Marcin Kilarski. 2013. “Functions of Nominal Classification”. Language Sciences 40.263–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Craig, Colette G. 1986. “Jacaltec Noun Classifiers: A study in grammaticalization”. Lingua 70: 4.241–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William. 1994. “Semantic Universals in Classifier Systems”. Word 45.145–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daley, Karen Ann C. 1998. The Use of Classifiers in Vietnamese Narrative Texts. Arlington, Texas: Summer Institute of Linguistics and The University of Texas at Arlington.Google Scholar
Downing, Pamela. 1996. Numeral Classifier Systems: The case of Japanese. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erbaugh, Mary S.1986. “Taking Stock: The development of Chinese noun classifiers historically and in young children”. Noun Classes and Categorization ed. by Colette G. Craig, 399–436. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara. 1987. Discourse Structure and Anaphora: Written and conversational English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1976. “Topic, Pronoun, and Grammatical Gender.”. Subject and Topic ed. by Charles N. Li, 149–188. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
. 1983a. “ Topic Continuity in Discourse: An introduction.”. Givón, ed. 1983b.1–41Google Scholar
, ed. 1983b. Topic Continuity in Discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grinevald, Colette. 2000. “ A Morphosyntactic Typology of Classifiers.”. Systems of Nominal Classification ed. by Gunter Senft, 50–92. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Gundel, Jeanette K., Nancy Hedberg & Ron Zacharski. 1993. “Cognitive Status and the Form of Referring Expressions in Discourse”. Language 69.274–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 1982. “African Noun Class Systems.”. Apprehension: Das sprachliche Erfassen von Gegenständen, Vol. I: Bereich und Ordnung der Phänomene ed. by Hansjakob Seiler & Christian Lehmann (= Language Universal Series), 189–216. Tübingen: Gunter NarrGoogle Scholar
Katamba, Francis. 2003. “Bantu Nominal Morphology.”. The Bantu Languages ed. by Derek Nurse & Gérard Philippson, 103–120. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1986. “Classifiers as a Reflection of Mind.”. Noun Classes and Categorization ed. by Colette Craig, 13–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1988. “On the Function of Agreement”. Agreement in Natural Languages ed. by Michael Barlow & Charles A. Ferguson, 55–65. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive Meaning: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McGregor, William B. 2002. Verb Classification in Australian Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. 1984. “The Evolution of Noun Incorporation”. Language 60.847–894. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1992. Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. “Diversity and Stability in Language.”. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics ed. by Brain D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda, 283–310. Malden, MA: Blackwell DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nida, Eugene. 1975. Componential Analysis of Meaning: An introduction to semantic structures. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Olstad, John. 2011. “Noun Class Assignment in Swahili via Bayesian Probability.” On Words and Sounds: A selection of papers from the 40th PLM, 2009 ed. by Kamila Dębowska-Kozłowska & Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, 180–194. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars..Google Scholar
Payne, Thomas E. 1988. “Referential Distance and Discourse Structure in Yagua”. Studies in Language 12.345–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seifart, Frank. 2005. The Structure and Use of Shape-Based Noun Classes in Miraña (North West Amazon) (= MPI Series in Psycholinguistics, 33). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. [URL]. (Accessed: 1 March 2014.)Google Scholar
. 2010. “Nominal Classification”. Language & Linguistics Compass 4:8.719–736. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob. 1986. Apprehension: Language, object, and order. Part III: The universal dimension of apprehension. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Wichmann, Søren & Eric W. Holman. 2009. Temporal Stability of Linguistic Typological Features (= LINCOM Studies in Theoretical Linguistics, 42). Munich: LINCOM EUROPA.Google Scholar
Wiebusch, Thekla. 2009. “The Diachronic Development of Chinese Numeral Classifiers.” Paper presented at The Diachrony of Classification Systems, Netherlands Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities and Social Sciences, March 2009.Google Scholar
Wilkins, David P. 1996. “Morphology”. Contact Linguistics: An international handbook of contemporary research ed. by Hans Goebl, Peter H. Nelde, Zdenek Starý & Wolfgang Wölck, Vol. I, 109–117. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Wurzel, Wolfgang Ullrich. 1986. “Die wiederholte Klassifikation von Substantiven: Zur Entstehung von Deklinationsklassen”. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 39:1.76–96.Google Scholar
Zubin, David & Klaus Michael Köpke. 1986. “Gender and Folk Taxonomy: The indexical relation between grammatical and lexical categorization”. Noun Classes and Categorization ed. by Colette Craig, 139–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Di Garbo, Francesca & Annemarie Verkerk
2022. A typology of northwestern Bantu gender systems. Linguistics 60:4 ► pp. 1169 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.